Who ordered another extra-large douche? Seems like one was plenty.
Wait, just how old is Limbaugh?
:dubious: The GOP have a nicely gerrymandered double majority, thanks. The Dem legislators could pretty much stay home and accomplish as much.
Infamous.
Truman was no saint.
Well sure - that plus that whole “Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court”. But when I think Twain, I think Missouri (and TNG episodes where he hangs out with Whoopi). I just thought it was funny.
Nope. And since I don’t consider you an element of the set “anyone”, I still haven’t. :D*
What do you do, follow me around the board? Speaking of the need to get a life… 
Why don’t you shut off your computer for a while and go to your state’s Hall of Fame.
Let me guess, you live in Missouri… Or perhaps you are just the asshole most folks on the board think you are.
Wait a minute. Let me put you back on ignore. There, that’s better. (no, really… it IS better)
Now wank away, fuckstick. The only thing your pointless comments will bother now is your keyboard.
* - Lobohan’s official “I’m being a prick, but this is my “I was just kidding, can’t you take a joke?”” smilie.
Interesting link on Truman. Thanks for posting that.
Infamous? In what way? He’s not Pol Pot. He’s a conservative talking head. Just how are you defining Infamous?
Well, as someone that lives in the UK, the only publicity I’ve seen for him has been negative.
The halls of logic and political discourse have been ravaged by a troop of shit-flinging monkeys and vomited upon by diseased vultures. The doors may have been cracked by predecessors, I’ll (Bob) Grant you that, but the malignant depravities he forced upon rational thought and discussion would make Zed blush.
(only mildly tongue and cheek)
. . . and yet Jean Harlow is not in the Hall of Famous Missourians. *Her *bust would be worth seeing!
Well, I certainly can’t argue with that!
LOL too funny
Here’s a serious question for those anti Rush being in the Missouri HOF:
Should it be a popularity contest? Right now, it sounds like the state legislature puts people in, correct? If you turn something like this political, you are going to see people being banned for being in the wrong political party.
That makes no sense to me. Rush may not be a great human being in your mind, but is that what he is being judged on? He, to me anyway, is an entertainer pure and simple. And I find him no more abrasive than someone like James Carville. But, I wouldn’t keep Carvelle out of whatever state HOF he’d be considered for (Ark?) because I can’t stand him personally.
Maybe open the voting up to the entire state, and have them vote each November for whoever makes the preliminary ballot.
If Hall of Fames were based on character, most would be empty
Rush is a timbertool but there was no “stealth” about this. It’s been one of the top news items on radio and TV for weeks here in Missouri and Kansas, as well as a frequent topic on talk radio and talk TV shows such as “Ruckus.”
For some reason I’m feeling the desire to have spaghetti carbonara for lunch…
No, but apparently it is now. It should be based on merit.
There are other Missourians and former Missourians who have done more in entertainment, philanthropy, arts and science. So the Missouri Legislature picks a talk show host?
First… timbertool? Wasn’t that one of the regular features in Highlights magazine? I’d think Goofus and Gallant would be more appropriate.
Second, though I loathe the, uh, timbertool, and find his contributions to society absolutely repugnant, it is possible to observe that he has a vast listening base, particularly in the south (yes, south–a slave state and nominally aligned with the confederacy), and has advanced a political cause further than most politicians could do on their own. He is and has been a major party player for what, twenty years at least? His fans certainly think him HoF worthy, and though I’d like to tweak the statue’s nose, see why he’d be admitted.
Are you trying to get a rise out of me, detective?
Do I follow you around the board? When was the last time I responded to you, like a month ago?
In any case, I was pointing out that you were being histrionic.
I am not by any means a fan of Rush Limbaugh, but this seems to me sort of like a Pete Rose discussion. Purely on the grounds of fame or success in his field as a broadcaster, there is no doubt that he is one of the most famous and most successful of this generation, and based on that alone, I don’t think anyone would dispute he would belong in just about any state’s hall of fame. The issue arises when you start evaluating his personal life and views and that it definitely is an integral part of his impact on his field, just as Pete Rose’s betting affected his.
The problem here is that there isn’t any sort of universal rule or principle that will say that his views and message are inherently negative. Those who share his perspective will think that much more of his accomplishments and those who disagree with his perspective will think less of them. So I don’t think it’s fair to punish him for simply disagreeing with him, particularly since it’s important to minimize politics, even if a figure politics figure largely in a person’s contributions. For instance, regardless of your feelings for various presidents, I’d think every single one rightfully deserves a place in his home state’s hall of fame.
That said, I would say that there could be a legitimate case against him for situations of actively lying or creating excessive controversy or whatnot, but even a lot of that is difficult to filter out from his political message.
Either way, I don’t think putting him in the hall of fame diminishes the accomplishments of others in there. There’s a subjective minimum to get in, but there’s no tiers after that. And though I’m not a fan of his, I think he meets that minimum requirement accounting for the issues I disagree with him on.